Second Life Wiki Receives Takedown Notice

October 1, 2009 -

The creator of Second Life in Education, a wiki designed to document the educational uses of the online world, has received notice from developer Linden Labs that the site infringes on their trademark.

The website has been in operation since 2006. While Jokay Wollongong wrote on her blog that the notice came as “a kick in the guts,” the site’s founder said that she would not fight the request and would move the resources of her wiki to another domain. She also wrote:

I also worry that this is a sign of things to come for many other residents who are creating fantastic content.

Massively notes that one of the infringements in question centered on Linden Lab’s SL trademark, which they only registered within the past two weeks.


Comments

Re: Second Life Wiki Receives Takedown Notice

The thing is, if she had the site for this long and Linden Labs knew about it and said nothing until now, I would think she would have a leg to stand on, so long as she is not charging or making money off of it.

This just seems strange.

~Weatherlight~

~Weatherlight~

Re: Second Life Wiki Receives Takedown Notice

Actually, if it's because of the two-weeks-registered trademark, it makes perfect sense.

The thing is, under US law, a trademark must be actively defended in order for the registree to continue to claim it. This is actually at the root of a number of stories involving Disney suing people for painting Mickey Mouse on the walls of a daycare they run (or the like) -- if a competitor can prove that Disney (or Linden Labs, in this case) knew about unauthorized usage of the trademark but did not act, they have legitimate grounds for the courts to rule the trademark abandoned, at which point they can start using said trademark with their own products without having to pay a dime.

The Massively article did argue (and I would be inclined to agree, though of course it's not like I've ever taken, let alone passed, any bar exam) that the usage of the trademark in this context would likely fall under fair use, so I'm thinking Neeneko was right about it being an overzealous lawyer more worried about "Second Life" becoming a legally generic term for virtual worlds than about not pissing off the community.

Re: Second Life Wiki Receives Takedown Notice

I don't understand this? Is just as if Linden Labs (Second Life) does not want a website documented how much can be learned from playing computergames online. Hopefully, this is a just a lawyer who tries to earn his keep...

Re: Second Life Wiki Receives Takedown Notice

All the more reason why TM/CP needs to be scaled back....


Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

Re: Second Life Wiki Receives Takedown Notice

Massively had a good post on it pointing out that this is probably the result of a lawyer who was tasked with 'protecting the trademark' trying to rack up kills to prove their worth.

It would not surprise me if LL management came back with an apology... I would be surpised if they even knew this was happening ahead of time.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Infophile(cont'd) discriminatory. This can only be done for protected classes which are outlined in law (race, sex, religion, ethnicity everywhere, sexual orientation in some states). So, a gay person could be fired because they're gay and have no recourse there.07/07/2015 - 7:27am
Infophile@Goth: See here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/firedforbeinggay.asp for a good discussion on it. Basically, the problem is that in the US, most states allow at will firing, and it's the burden of the fired person to prove the firing was ...07/07/2015 - 7:25am
Goth_SkunkAssuming that's true, then that is a fight worth fighting for.07/07/2015 - 6:58am
Yuuri@ Goth_Skunk, in many states being gay is not a protected status akin to say race or religion. It's also in the "Right to work" states. Those are the states where one can be fired for any reason (provided it isn't a "protected" one.)07/07/2015 - 6:07am
Goth_Skunkregarded as a beacon of liberty and freedom that is the envy of the world, would not have across-the-board Human Rights laws that don't at the very least equal those of my own country.07/07/2015 - 5:47am
Goth_SkunkI find that hard to believe, Infophile. I have difficulty believing employers can *still* fire people for being gay. I would need to see some evidence that this is fact, because as a Canadian, I can't believe that the United States,07/07/2015 - 5:46am
InfophileFor that matter, even women don't yet have full legal equality with men. The US government still places limits on the positions women can serve in the military. And that's just the legal side of things - the "culture wars" are more than just laws.07/07/2015 - 5:43am
InfophileAnd that's just LGB issues. Get ready for an incoming battle on rights for trans* people. And then after that, a battle for poly people.07/07/2015 - 5:41am
InfophileA battle's been won. In many states employers can still fire people for being gay. And in many states, parents can force their children into reparative therapy to try to "fix" being gay. Those battles still need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:40am
Goth_Skunkand now they've switched to battles that don't need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:37am
Goth_SkunkIn my opinion, it was the final legal hurdle denying homosexual couples final and recognized statuses as eligible spouses. But even though this war's been won, some people are still too keen to keep fighting battles,07/07/2015 - 5:28am
Goth_SkunkAnd it's a trend I don't mind seeing continue. Same-sex marriage was at long-last made definitively legal by SCOTUS, and it's about time. I'm glad it's finally happened, as it was desperately needed.07/07/2015 - 5:25am
Infophile(cont'd) It started long before that. Perhaps the American Civil War comes to mind?)07/07/2015 - 3:59am
InfophileOn Goth's linked article: Historically speaking, there may have been cycles, but remember that the left has steadily gained ground. Is there a good reason to expect that to be different this time? (Oh, and no, Culture War 1.0 wasn't with the Baby Boomers.07/07/2015 - 3:59am
Goth_Skunk"THIS VIDEO IS PROBLEMATIC:" About Social Justice Warriors, by J.T. Sexkik. Excellent video. http://ow.ly/PgGnD07/07/2015 - 3:22am
Goth_Skunkand repeats the cycle, over and over. Presently, the far left culture is overreaching, and is about to lose their stranglehold on power.07/06/2015 - 10:01pm
Goth_SkunkAs far back as the 60's, according to the writers. The culture war moves in cycles from one generation to the next. The left rebels against the right, takes over, overreaches to the point where the right rebels right back, takes over, overreaches ->07/06/2015 - 9:58pm
MattsworknameGoth, what "Comming overreach" , the media and goverment have been overreaching for years07/06/2015 - 9:34pm
MattsworknameJim sterling is awesome ,dont always agree with him, but when it came to those guys, he was dead on. Thank god for jim.07/06/2015 - 9:33pm
Goth_Skunk"Welcome to Culture War 4.0: The Coming Overreach" an excellent opinion piece by The Federalist. http://ow.ly/Pggw507/06/2015 - 9:32pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician